New Tax?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Just when you thought they had come up with every way to bleed you, taxes by the mile. The latest outrage.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory2/2828417

Quote

Instead of paying tax at gas pump,
someday you may pay by the mile
By LUCAS WALL
Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle

PHILADELPHIA - Paying your road taxes in the future might depend more on how much you drive than how much gasoline you pump.

Texas is among a group of states researching how to replace the fuel tax with a fee based on the number of miles traveled — making every road a virtual tollway. Transportation officials from across the world discussed the concept here at last month's annual meetings of the trade groups representing the highway and tollway industries.

Fees for miles traveled would be measured by Global Positioning System receivers embedded in vehicles. The system would track which roads a motorist uses so the virtual tolls could be distributed to the appropriate agency.

Quote

Researchers love the idea that driving taxes could be adjusted to promote or discourage certain actions. The system could charge more per mile during peak hours, for instance, or add a surcharge for heavy trucks and sport utility vehicles.

Those promoting a mileage-based approach to highway taxes contend driving should be metered and billed according to use.

"Why shouldn't transportation be seen as a utility like electricity, water, etc.?" Hal Worrall, a consultant for Transportation Innovations Inc., asked during a panel at the International Bridge, Tunnel and Toll Road Association conference. "It's perceived as free in America and thus produces a large demand."

Quote

As more hybrid and alternative-power vehicles are built, Forkenbrock said, gas-tax collections will suffer.

"A tax at the point of purchase is inferior to user charges at the exact point of travel," he said, explaining the growth of toll roads in recent years.

[akarunway 1]

That ain't shit. I just read an article in the paper where the U.N. is proposing to tax American citizens (a global tax fee) for using there ATM cards and another bank user fee, an energy user fee (gas etc.), an internet user fee, mainly aimed at U.S. citizens. Backed mainly by Chirac >imagine that and Brazil < and w/ support of up to 150 countries. Wriiten by Daniel J. Mitchell w/ the Heritage Foundation. It isn't posted on their website yet >I looked< and I don't wanna spend all day typing but I will post the article when I find it

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[cvfd1399 0]

(cellphone commercial) Im sorry honey you went over your 4 lane highway miles this month(/dumb commercial) that sucks

[nate_1979 9]

That has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever seen.. I like it the way it is, if you wanna drive your big ass gas guzzling SUV by yourself all the time, pay the tax at the pump... What they gonna do, make you buy some GPS device to put in your car before you can continue to drive it? Also seems like this could be a violation of privacy as a GPS receiver tracking your driving habits could also track where you go / hang out.. Screw that.

FGF #???
I miss the sky...
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.

[Gravitymaster 0]

I'm thinking we need a another gun thread about now.
Hey, John Rich, Peaceful Jeffrey.

[nate_1979 9]

Quote

I'm thinking we need a another gun thread about now.
Hey, John Rich, Peaceful Jeffrey.

Well, we got that Guns vs Doctors thread.... Seems everyone went after the doctors on that one though when the guns were clearly the issue

FGF #???
I miss the sky...
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

That ain't shit. I just read an article in the paper where the U.N. is proposing to tax American citizens (a global tax fee) for using there ATM cards and another bank user fee, an energy user fee (gas etc.), an internet user fee, mainly aimed at U.S. citizens. Backed mainly by Chirac >imagine that and Brazil < and w/ support of up to 150 countries. Wriiten by Daniel J. Mitchell w/ the Heritage Foundation. It isn't posted on their website yet >I looked< and I don't wanna spend all day typing but I will post the article when I find i

What the hell are you talking about! The UN has no jurisdiction over US taxation (neither does Chirac nor Brazil last I checked). I'd love to read the article once you get a link.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[akarunway 1]

= Here ya go...U.N. plots global taxes

International money grab targets American workers


08:44 AM PDT on Friday, October 8, 2004



By DANIEL J. MITCHELL

At the risk of stating the obvious, the United Nations hasn't been America's friend in recent years.

It has obstructed the war on terrorism. It has honored corrupt dictatorships with seats on its Human Rights Commission. Its budget is riddled with waste and fraud, and the United States pays the lion's share of the tab. And it serves as a platform for anti-American rhetoric - much of it from governments that receive U.S. foreign aid.

But this situation may be about to get worse. Led by France and Brazil, the United Nations now wants to impose global taxes. At a recent U.N. summit meeting, politicians from more than 100 nations endorsed a $50 billion global tax to finance even more foreign aid. Not surprisingly, the bureaucrats have many different schemes to fleece the world's taxpayers.

Taxing ATM Use

One of the most popular ideas is a tax on financial transactions. This would have an especially adverse effect on the United States, which has the world's largest financial system.

Americans probably don't want to pay a tax to the United Nations every time they use their ATM cards, but that would be only the tip of the iceberg. U.N. kleptocrats also are considering a tax on energy use. So if you use your ATM card to get money to fill your car with gas, you might get to pay twice. But don't let this upset you too much, because if you go online to complain to your congressional representative, you could pay another tax - since taxing Internet usage is another global tax being contemplated by the U.N. crowd.

These ideas are bad enough, but the worst proposal is a scheme endorsed by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to create an International Tax Organization. This new super-bureaucracy would have vast new powers, including the collection of global taxes. The U.N. report endorsing this proposed bureaucracy even stated that foreign governments should have some ability to tax American workers.

Fortunately, there is some good news. President Bush opposes a new international tax bureaucracy and he has no intention of allowing the United Nations to impose taxes on American citizens. At the recent U.N. summit, Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman unambiguously rejected the global tax power-grab. Higher levels of foreign aid aren't the answer, she said: "Economic growth is the long-term solution to hunger and poverty."

France is All for it

Such logic is lost, though, on leaders such as French President Jacques Chirac - one of the world's biggest supporters of global taxation.

But why should America accept awful tax policy just to appease the French? Chirac even threatened the United States at the U.N. summit: "However strong the Americans may be, you cannot in the long run emerge victorious by opposing an idea that is backed by 100 countries and which will probably be approved by 150, creating a new political situation."

President Bush correctly has ignored these thinly veiled French threats. But the threat from the U.N. cannot be so easily dismissed. The United Nations already has a mini-bureaucracy known as the "ad hoc Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters." This entity has published a report exploring ways to help foreign governments tax income earned in America.

How About Competing?

These ideas are ludicrous. America is attracting jobs and investment from all over the world because our tax burden is lower. This upsets some foreign governments, who argue that the United States is guilty of "harmful tax competition."

But if high-tax nations are worried that investment funds are fleeing to America, they should lower their punitive taxes on saving and investment. If welfare states are worried that talented entrepreneurs are immigrating to America, they should lower their income-tax rates.

Uncompetitive countries such as France should be allowed to keep their terrible tax systems, of course, but they shouldn't try to drag other nations down to their level. Global taxes and an International Tax Organization are both attempts to undermine America's economic advantage by creating a tax cartel - an OPEC for politicians, if you will.

President Bush is right to reject them.

Daniel J. Mitchell is the McKenna fellow in political economy at The Heritage Foundation, a Washington-based public policy research institute.------------------------------------------------------------------------------Add to that . This from the U.N.'s website. Part of the proposal---------------------------------------------------Their 150-page report suggests a tax be imposed on greenhouse gas emissions as well as certain financial transactions, arms sales and multinational corporations to build a 50-billion-dollar war chest to fight poverty. Other proposed approaches raise the possibility of taxes levied on ships transiting key maritime straits, airline tickets, credit card purchases as well as an international lottery.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Jimbo 0]

Got a link for your story?

Edit: Nevermind. http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=U%2EN%2E+plots+global+taxes

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[PhreeZone 15]

Oh thats story is not biased in the least

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[free_man 0]

This is nothing new, UN has been for sometime, imposing their agenda on America, they do it through treaty.

Congress not doing their job.


http://www.getusout.org/

http://www.stoptheftaa.org/

More Big Brother:

Feds plan to track every car
Obscure agency working on technology to monitor all vehicles

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40795

“…because I hope you know this, I think you do…all governments are lying cocksuckers.”
Bill Hicks, Relentless

[kallend 1,623]

Maybe we'll ignore the UN resolution, and then Bush will order an invasion of the US to get us to comply.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Maybe we'll ignore the UN resolution, and then Bush will order an invasion of the US to get us to comply.

All he has to do is change the locks on UN HQ in New York.

[dorbie 0]

This is already in place in the UK, let this be a warning to you :-)

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=1200&id=72

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Pish, not even close to being the same thing, assuming you are moaning about the congestion charge.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[dorbie 0]

He he. OK it was a stretch, but I like the way you call this tax a charge. Very British.

I dunno what's worse, socialist social engineering or anti-economic tax grab. Either way London definitely gets what it deserves. Impressive the way Ken stood up to New Labor & won.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"but I like the way you call this tax a charge"

It is a charge, it doesn't vary, if you don't want to pay it, take public transport or ride a bike. It is after all, designed to reduce congestion. And for what its worth, its not only London.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[dorbie 0]

Hey call it what you like, I know what it is. If you don't want to pay VAT you don't have to buy VAT rated goods it's still a tax. Utter nonsense to say a "charge" isn't a tax because the thing your charged for is optional. The "charge" isn't optional.

Your TV "license" isn't a tax either I suppose, I mean you don't need to watch TV.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

VAT is a tax, its what the 'T' stands for, as in Value Added Tax.

What you were refering to is a charge, exactly like the charge you pay at tolls, on turnpikes, fast roads etc.

"I mean you don't need to watch TV." TV license is just bizarre and should be done away with, its most like a tax out of the examples we've discussed, but you don't need a license (tax) to watch TV, just to own one..

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[dorbie 0]

Yes, the T in that label was my point. You seem to be saying that unless it has "tax" in the label the government gives it then it's not a tax. That's somewhat naive.

And you are of course correct, you don't need to pay tax to merely watch TV, unless you drive into London to watch it, then you have to pay Red Ken's congestion tax.

[PhillyKev 0]

Seems like a very libertarian concept to me. Tax people based on their usage.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Yes, the T in that label was my point. You seem to be saying that unless it has "tax" in the label the government gives it then it's not a tax. That's somewhat naive.

And you are of course correct, you don't need to pay tax to merely watch TV, unless you drive into London to watch it, then you have to pay Red Ken's congestion tax.

OK, around here (Chicago) we have the Tri-State Tollway, the Reagan Tollway, the North-South Tollway, the Northwest Tollway, the Chicago Skyway (Toll), and the Indiana Tollroad. Am I paying a tax or a use fee when I use these roads? How is paying to drive on these any different from paying Red Ken's congestion "tax"?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,400]

>Tax people based on their usage.

Except that large vehicles "use up" the road a lot more than small vehicles do. Vehicle weight is a direct predictor on how long roads last. A gas tax seems fairer in this regard; a heavy vehicle that drives long distances will use the most gas and cause the most road wear.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

>Tax people based on their usage.

Except that large vehicles "use up" the road a lot more than small vehicles do. Vehicle weight is a direct predictor on how long roads last. A gas tax seems fairer in this regard; a heavy vehicle that drives long distances will use the most gas and cause the most road wear.

According to research in the UK, road wear goes as the cube of axle weight and directly as the number of axles and miles driven.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[PhillyKev 0]

I didn't see anything in that article that said they couldn't or wouldn't factor in the type of vehicle when assessing the tax. Considering that toll roads charge different tolls based on type of vehicle and number of axles, I'm assuming they would also incorporate this info, particularly since they're talking about tracking individual vehicles. I would think this process would more accurately assess taxes based on road wear than gasoline usage. Two gallons of gas might take me 80 miles on my bike, but I guarantee I'm doing less damage to the road than a hybrid gettting the same mileage.